06.09.2010, 12:33
Good example, but I still don't see how it would work if you had to have the rotating plate on the outside, as it would be in this design. With a helicopter swashplate the moving parts are on the inside and are driven by the engine's drive shaft, which is in turn controlled by the pilot. Also with a helicopter there is no fuselage and cockpit positioned above the main rotor, nothing to interfere with the rotor's movement. In this aircraft design the engines are on the outside, as is the moving "ring" that the wings are attached to. There is no visible means to control the pitch of the wings (as on a helicopter) and no means to control fuel input from the pilot's throttle control to the engines in order to control thrust.
The engines appear to be some sort of ramjet- would they need to be started by ground crew and just run at full power until the fuel was spent? The engines could not possibly all run out of fuel at exactly the same time- what effect would that have, having one or two engines running and another just dead weight, wouldn't the airframe rip itself apart?
I think this was dreamed up by someone who needed to appear busy at a time when he otherwise might have been handed a rifle and told to march east to meet the Russians. "Oh look, this will win the war for us"
Fifty years later it becomes part of the myth of Nazi technical superiority.
The engines appear to be some sort of ramjet- would they need to be started by ground crew and just run at full power until the fuel was spent? The engines could not possibly all run out of fuel at exactly the same time- what effect would that have, having one or two engines running and another just dead weight, wouldn't the airframe rip itself apart?
I think this was dreamed up by someone who needed to appear busy at a time when he otherwise might have been handed a rifle and told to march east to meet the Russians. "Oh look, this will win the war for us"
Fifty years later it becomes part of the myth of Nazi technical superiority.